To the Editor: Professor Kuslan is quite correct when he accuses me of making certain generalizations about the preparation in science of teacher-candidates in normal schools during the latter part of the nineteenth century. However, I was led to such conclusions by evidence which I uncovered in the literature. If this evidence is not trustworthy, then I am glad to be made aware of it. There is no doubt that in the large city school system, high school teachers were, in general, liberal arts college and university graduates. But it is doubtful whether smaller towns were able to afford such trained people. I would guess that such high schools (and they still make up a major part of the total number of high schools in the country) were staffed by normal school graduates, many of whom might have only trained originally for elementary school teaching. Jessie M. Pangburn in "The Evolution of the American Teachers College" (Columbia, 1932) indicates this situation: "Although college graduation was regarded as a minimum standard for the preparation of the high school teacher, the annual output of the colleges was absorbed by the larger cities and towns, so that the graduate of the normal school was frequently the best teacher material the ambitious small community could secure for its embryonic high school." And further on the same page (p. 11): "In accepting the responsibility of preparing teachers for the high school, the normal schools undertook a task for which their resources were not appropriate. They failed to make adequate provision for the cultural enrichment of their students, and when the high school pupils whom these students went out t o teach later sought admission to the colleges and universities, they were frequently so deficient in their preparation so as to cause serious embarrassment to the higher institutions." I did find an interesting set of statistics about New Eneland hieh schools in a Ph.D. thesis done a t Lei~zie in -1893 by Fred ,W. Atkinson: "The ~rofessibnai Preparation of Science Teachers in the United States." Of 1136 high school teachers in New England, Atkinson found 56% t o be college graduates, 21% normal school graduates, and 23% who never completed high school. Undoubtedly, some of the better normal schools did attempt to provide instruction in the sciences that was of college caliber. This is particularly true of such schools as Illinois State Normal School. I n 1873-74, this normal school added advanced work in the natural sciences, Latin, Greek, German, French, and mathematics, (see "Development of the Teachers College in the United States," Charles A. Harper, Bloomiugton, 1935). This coincided, of course, with the legislative action in Illinois requiring prospective high school teachers to pass examinations in physiology, botany, zoology, and chemistry. Forbes, in "History and Status of Public School Science Work in Illinois," (1889) pointed out that there was a rush to accelerate teachers through examinations in these subjects. The Illinois Schoolmaster, in 1872, published some outline lessons in these subjects, virtually guaranteeing that anyone learning these lessons would pass the required examinations with ease. Between July 1 and October 1, 1872, 3114 teachers out of 3975 passed the natural science examinations required for the teaching of secondary school science. During the 1880's and VOLUME 35, NO. 8, AUGUST, 1958
18901s, however, the State Normal School apparently provided quite adequate instruction in geology and the biological sciences. Professor Kuslan is also quite comct in indicating that normal school graduates who had deliberately prepared for high school science teaching in one of the better normal schools could be as good teachers as, or even better than, college graduates. The stagnation and desiccation of high school science teaching from the last decade of the nineteenth century to the second decade of the twentieth can be attributed more to the influence of the college than to that of the normal school. I am sorry that Professor Knslan interpreted my interpretation as an attack on the teachers colleges. I was only trying to indicate the part played by the late nineteenth century normal schools in the lack of adequately prepared science teachers in the United States. I think that there is place for a good factual work on the part played by the various normal schools in the providing of science teachers a t the secondary level. Insofar as the contemporary scene is concerned, I am well aware of the lack of recognition by the liberal arts schools of their responsibility in supplying teachers for the community. The teachers colleges certainly are not to blame for the present situation in high school science. There is need for more understanding about each other on the part of both institutions. It is good t o know that attempts are being made, particularly on a heroic scale by Dean Francis Keppel of the Harvard Graduate School of Education, to get representatives of both together a t conference tables. SIDNEYROSEK BRANDEIS UNIYEBSITY WALTHAM. MASSACHUSE~ To The Editor: Professor Rosen has kindly sent me his reply to my letter commenting on his article. I wish to cite the sources for my statements that few of the science teachers in the public high schools of New England were products of the normal schools. The "Annual Report of the Rhode Island Commissioner of Common Schools," 1900, p. 46, states that only 5% of the secondary school teachers of Rhode Island at the turn of the century were normal school products. The "Annual Report of the Connecticut State Board of Education," 1905, pp. 679-704, states that about 13% of the high school teachers in the state were products of the normal schools. The "Sixty-First Annual Report of the Massachusetts State Board of Education," 1898, p. 431, states that only 13Yo of the Massachusetts high school teachers were normal school graduates. Frank A. Hill cited identical figures in an address, "How Far the Public High School Is a Just Charge Upon the Public Treasury," before the New England Association of Collegiate and Preparatory Schools at Springfield, Massachusetts, October 15, 1898. The situation is very different in New York. Thirtynine per cent of the secondary school teachers were graduates of the normal schools. See "Bulletin of the High School Department of the University of the State of New York," March, 1898, p. 340.
